December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Did you ever think...
by Black Unicorn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Did anyone ever think that maybe, just maybe, PGP was developed, and > before the programmer started giving it away for free, that he was > paid by the government to give them the key which can unlock ANY PGP > locked document/file/etc??? No.

1 0

Liberty net?
by gtoal＠an-teallach.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Did anyone on this group give my email address to some pyramid-subscription scheme called 'Liberty net'? I'd quite like to know which of my 'friends' (as it says in the advert) was responsible... Thanks G

1 0

ViaCrypt PGP and Linux
by markh＠wimsey.bc.ca 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Subject: ViaCrypt PGP and Linux A short note to say that the SCO version of ViaCrypt PGP for Unix works under the latest version of the ibcs emulator for Linux. If you have ViaCrypt PGP for Unix and want to give this a try, you need a recent Linux kernel (1.0+), and the following file available by anon ftp tsx-11.mit.edu:/pub/linux/ALPHA/ibcs-940422.tar.gz Be sure to get this version, and not one of the earlier versions. Disclaimers 1. My only connection with ViaCrypt is as a customer. 2. This message is provided _AS IS_. In particular, this may not work for you. I assume no responsibility for actions you may take partially or wholly based on this message, even if I have been negligent in some way by posting this message or not correctly verifying the content of this message. In other words, if you buy ViaCrypt PGP for Unix based on the fact that you believe you'll be able to run the SCO binary, and you can't make it work, don't come crying to me saying that you spent money based on my message. Fact is, it works for me, but that is all I'm saying. Sorry to be so pedantic, but given the way the world of Linux is, I'd be a fool not to say it. Mark -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.4 iQBVAgUBLbidJGrJdmD9QWqxAQE1TAH/YwraTeBpVr9D9GWzzO9z4cBBOdmSrQOJ Ts5UpeuOqj4qKNKg4SCE6WJ0SmXrAulOjAYaXEKwxjb6Ljn941U0vg== =VJ9t -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- Mark Henderson markh(a)wimsey.bc.ca - RIPEM MD5: F1F5F0C3984CBEAF3889ADAFA2437433 ViaCrypt PGP key fingerprint: 21 F6 AF 2B 6A 8A 0B E1 A1 2A 2A 06 4A D5 92 46 low security key fingerprint: EC E7 C3 A9 2C 30 25 C6 F9 E1 25 F3 F5 AF 92 E3 cryptography archive maintainer -- anon ftp to ftp.wimsey.bc.ca:/pub/crypto

1 0

Re: THE FREEDOM DAEMON
by wcs＠anchor.ho.att.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Gary Jeffers proposes a system to perform remailing and chat-session relay which, among other proposed features, propagates itself by virus and worm approaches; the important issue is not the precise semantics of the differences, but that the thing tries to spread itself and run without the help or even permission of the owners of the machines it tries to run on. This is bad. It's offensive to try and run your stuff on people's machines without asking them or informing them. It can break stuff, it can hog their resources for your application (which is no more pro-freedom than having them hog your resources wihtout permission), and it's *so bloody unnecessary*! If you make a system that's easy to install and propagates information about how to get a copy of it (e.g. by sending header or signature lines in any mail it remails), then you can still propagate your software, but you can do it as a good guy rather than a bad guy. I have no more desire to have a "FREEDOM VIRUS" appear on my systems than a "BIG BROTHER VIRUS". Bill

2 1

RE: Warrantless searches- sorry to bring this back....
by GERSTEIN＠SCSUD.CTSTATEU.EDU 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Sorry this reply has taken so long..... My comments are below. -------------- Date: Sun, 17 Apr 1994 16:48:16 -0400 (EDT) From: Llywelyn <samman(a)CS.YALE.EDU> Subject: RE: Warrantless searches -- A sign of things to come? To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com Cc: mrami(a)MINERVA.CIS.YALE.EDU Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com Adam writes: > Anyway, the point is, these people aren't safe in their own homes. The parents > keep their children home from school because they are afraid that they will either > get shot (which happens quite a lot, one child was shot by a "gangsta" with a > sniper rifle while his mother was walking him to school- the kid was about 5 years > old) or that the kids will get involved in the gangs. > > For a while, the Chicago PD were unwilling to enter the buildings until after the > shooting had stopped, and would then go in to tag and bag the bodies. IT WAS BAD!!! Ok, now let me get this straight. The police who are supposed to 'serve and protect' weren't willing to go in there to protect their constituents because it was too dangerous, but in the same breath they want to remove these people's ability to protect themselves. Just wanted to make sure. Ben. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- The cops aren't unwilling to go in there, it's just not safe. Period. Think about it. The cops have a .38 or a 9mm if they are lucky. Some of them may even have bullet-proof vests to wear. Some of the smarter cops have been able to find two bp vests to wear on patrol. So, they're cruising along, when a call goes out. One of the CHA buildings has a sniper on the roof. If they go anywhere near that building, he'll take they're heads right off. Or maybe the call is to make a bust on some drug-dealer. The dealers usually have someone listening to the police frequencies on a scanner, so that when the cops show up, they'll have a big surprise waiting. In the form of assualt shotguns, semi- and fully-automatic machine guns (the Mac-10 and Uzi are quite popular with druggies and gang's these days). And what kind of bullets are the bad guys using? Not what the cops get to use. Oh-no! The baddies have the "Cop-Killer" bullets: armor piercing, Teflon coated bullets that two bp vests WILL NOT stop. Alternatively, the baddies could just pump the cop car full of lead. After all, a cop won't do much if he's busy bleeding to death from his knees, or if some "gangsta" shot his foot off. Think about it. The cops are out-gunned and out-manned. What would you do? And don't tell me that you would just go in there. I consider myself pretty brave, but I don't think even for a second that I would be able to even consider going in there, not without a nice, warm, cozy M1 Abrams Tank surrounding me. And even then I wouldn't be truly safe. These cops are doing the best that they can, and everyone in the U.S. are worrying more about the "rights" of these gang-bangers and drug-dealers than they are about the rights of the innocent people that are trapped in these buildings. And don't even start to tell me that the "innocents" can just leave, cos these CHA buildings are the only place they can afford to live. You folks are to busy yelling about the illegal searches to even think of coming up with an alternative. Maybe if you spent a little time thinking about what it's like to live in a place like this, you might shut up about the cops not doing their jobs. Adam Gerstein ------ Comments to GERSTEIN(a)SCSU.CTSTATEU.EDU Flames to /dev/null FIGHT CLIPPER -=- OPPOSE CLIPPER -=- FIGHT CLIPPER -=- OPPOSE CLIPPER -=-

4 3

clipper/chosen plaintext attacks
by Matt Thomlinson 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

even with plaintext/ciphertext pairs, it has been shown that hundreds of millions of pairs are needed to determine anything about the key involved (DES). I'm sure some of the many responses to your post will include more precise facts. Matt Thomlinson University of Washington, Seattle, Washington. phone: (206) 548-9804 Check my home page -- ftp://ftp.u.washington.edu/public/phantom/home.html PGP 2.2 key available via email, or finger phantom(a)hardy.u.washington.edu

1 0

Re: Secure Hash Standard (SHS/SHA) Broken by NSA
by lcottrell＠popmail.ucsd.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Jim Gillogly Says > NIST ANNOUNCES TECHNICAL CORRECTION TO SECURE HASH STANDARD > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > The National Institute of Standards and Technology today announced it > will initiate a technical modification to a computer security standard > used to support the authentication of electronic messages. The > revision will correct a minor flaw that government mathematicians > discovered in a formula that underlies the standard. > > ... remains a highly secure way to ensure integrity of ... > NIST expects that products implementing the current standard can be > used until the technical correction becomes effective. > > Researchers at the National Security Agency, who developed the formula > and discovered the flaw in a continuing evaluation process, now believe > that although the forumla in FIPS 180 is less secure than originally > thought, it is still extremely reliable as a technical computer > security mechanism. The discovery of this flaw indicates the value of > continued research on existing and new standards. So, have they mentioned what the problem was, or how to fix it? -------------------------------------------------- Lance Cottrell who does not speak for CASS/UCSD loki(a)nately.ucsd.edu PGP 2.3 key available by finger or server. "Love is a snowmobile racing across the tundra. Suddenly it flips over, pinning you underneath. At night the ice weasels come." --Nietzsche

1 0

Cypherpunk Criminal
by paul＠hawksbill.sprintmrn.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Christian, I finally received my tees in the mail yesterday. Very, very cool. The .gifs certainly didn't do them justice. Thanks again, _______________________________________________________________________________ Paul Ferguson US Sprint Enterprise Internet Engineering tel: 703.904.2437 Herndon, Virginia USA internet: paul(a)hawk.sprintmrn.com

3 5

How to explain...
by Jim Sewell - KD4CKQ 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi folks! I have something I'm sure someone on the list can help with. I need to explain to someone who is "mostly-illiterate" about computers why it is so difficult to break an RSA or DES type code. This person is a good user and a beginning programmer. I understand intuitively, but not well enough to explain it. His thinking is that if you have formula X to go from plain to crypt then just reverse X and you'll have the decryption algorithm. He figures that reversing a math formula could be difficult, but given a desire and a few weeks that nearly any formula can simply be reversed. If you can explain it well and simplistically I'd appreciate it. (As I said, I intuitively understand, but can't explain it well.) Thanks, Jim -- Tantalus Inc. Bringing people together Jim Sewell-KD4CKQ 2407 N. Roosevelt Blvd. to have a little fun. Internet: jims(a)mpgn.com Key West, FL 33041 CIS: 71061,1027 (305) 293-8100 "We keep coding and coding and coding..."

2 1

Lord Have Mercy On Us All :-(
by tim werner 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Date: Fri, 22 Apr 1994 15:08:25 -0700 (PDT) >From: "Arthur R. McGee" <amcgee(a)netcom.com> > >If this doesn't scare you, nothing will. :-( > >---------- Forwarded message ---------- > > THE WHITE HOUSE > Office of the Vice President > ____________________________________________________________ > For Immediate Release April 20, 1994 > > > GORE JOINS BENTSEN, RENO IN CRIME TECHNOLOGY DEMONSTRATION > Vice President Announces Inter-Agency Agreements > Why is this scary? It was just about police getting better methods of communicating with each other, as far as I could tell. I am not against the idea of police in general, just abuses of government power. How is the concept of police being better able to get fingerprints at the crime scene scary? If you break into my house, I'd like the police to be able to get your fingerprints. The police are a Good Thing when they are protecting me from fraud, theft, and physical attack. tw

1 0